Central Information Commission
Sewa Singh vs Ut Of Chandigarh on 15 January, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/UTOCH/A/2023/649317
Sewa Singh .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Health Department, Government
Multi-Specialty Hospital, Sector 16,
Chandigarh - 160015 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 13.01.2025
Date of Decision : 14.01.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 15.06.2023
CPIO replied on : 12.07.2023
First appeal filed on : 28.07.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 25.09.2023
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application (offline) dated 15.06.2023 seeking the following information:
"Kindly supply information regarding Memo No.E-III-2021/11598 dated 21.06.2021 issued to Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Page 1 of 8 Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH-16, Chandigarh issued to him regarding his misconduct, as under:
(a) What is the current status of Memo No.E-III-2021/11598 dated 21.06.2021 issued to Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH-16, Chandigarh as per which time bound reply was to be given by the delinquent.
(b) Whether Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH-16, Chandigarh has submitted his reply to Memo No.E-III-2021/11598 dated 21.06.2021 issued to him.;
(c) After how much time Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH-16, Chandigarh submitted his reply to Memo No.E-III-2021/11598 dated 21.06.2021.
(d) According to Rules as applicable upon Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH-16, Chandigarh, for how much time Memo No.E-III-2021/11598 dated 21.06.2021 could have been kept pending without taking reply from delinquent and whether any action has been taken against dealing hand for keeping the matter under carpet.
(e) Please tell/What were the special reasons for keeping Memo No.E- III-
2021/11598 dated 21.06.2021 pending for approximately two years;
(f) Whether any Disciplinary Action has been taken against Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GAMSH-16, Chandigarh for wilful misconduct/s, which are against the Service Rules as applicable upon him?
2. Whether fact regarding registration of an No.68. dated 12.07.2015 under Section/s 353, 332, 341, 137, 186, 189 read with Section 149 of IPC registered at Police Station Parwanoo, District: Solan (H.P.) against Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH-16, Chandigarh and others, is within the knowledge of the Medical Superintendent and Director, Health & Family Welfare, GMSH, Sector: 16, Chandigarh or not?
3. According to the Service Rules as applicable to Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH-16, Chandigarh, was he duty bound to intimate the concerned Senior officials/officers of Page 2 of 8 GMSH, Sector-16, Chandigarh about the registration of an FIR No.68, dated 12.07.2015 under Section/s 353, 332, 341, 137, 188, 189 read with Section 145 of IPC registered at Police Station: Parwanon, District: Solan (HP) against him and his family members,
4. Whether Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH-16, Chandigarh had intimated about the registration of an FIR No. A8, dated 12.07.2015 under Section/s 353, 332, 341, 137, 186, 189 read with Section 149 of IPC registered at Police Station:
Parwanoo, District: Solan (H.P.) against him and his family members to the concerned Sensor Officials/officers of GMSH, Sector 16, Chandigarh ? if so, please supply copy of such intimation to the undersigned.
5. Whether non intimation about the registration of an FIR No.6, dated 12.07.2015 under Section/s 353, 332, 341, 137, 186, 189 read with Section 149 of IFC registered at Police Station: Parwanoo, District: Salan (HP) against him and his family members is a MISCONDUCT as per Service Rules as applicable on Harpal Singh Bai (above mentioned)
6. Whether Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH-16, Chandigarh had intimated to the concerned official's of GMSH, Sector:16, Chandigarh that he was arrested in pursuance to Fin No.68, dated 12.07.2015 under Section/s 353, 332, 341, 137, 186, 189 read with Section 149 of IPC registered at Police Station:
Parwanoo, District: Solan (H.P.)?
7. Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH-16, Chandigarh, attended the Court proceedings initiated against him and others at Kasauli (H.P) from year 2015 to 2021 by availing Station Leave on some occasion but in none of the application/s deliberately not mentioned his "Address (while on CL)" on the specific column of his leave application/s, particularly when he was on Station Leave, amounts to Misconduct or not as per Service Rules as applicable upon him?
8. That under rule 3 (1) of Government Employees (Conduct) Rules, 1966, Every Government employee shall maintain (i) absolute integrity (ii) maintain devotion to duty and (ii) do nothing which is unbecoming of a Government employee and (iv) intimate his latest permanent as well as temporary address to his appointing authority. Whether Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH-16, Page 3 of 8 Chandigarh has violated these instructions and is liable to be charge sheeted for major penalty?"
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 12.07.2023 stating as under:
"1 to 8. The information sought is exempted under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 28.07.2023. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal on the following grounds:
"....4. That it is relevant to mention here that after the filing of the First Appeal with the Respondent no.2, Appellant received a letter bearing Memo No.MH- 111-2023/16502, dated 17.08.2023 Issued by/for Superintendent (Adm.), Appellate Authority under RTI Act-cum-Director Health & Family Welfare, Chandigarh Administration on directing the Appellant to appear before First Appellate Authority-cum DH&FW Chandigarh on 23.08.2023. Copy of the said letter along with photocopies of envelop of the same is appended herewith as Annexure A-4.
5. That it is pertinent to mention here that a perusal of the envelop of letter dated 17.08.2023 goes to show that the letter dated 17.08.2023 Issued to the Appellant is mere an eyewash because a careful perusal of the dispatch/postal slip goes to show that although the vide letter dated 17.08.2023 the Appellant was illegally directed to appear before the Respondent no.2 on 23.08.2023 but the said letter was deliberately posted on 25.08.2023 at 12.24 pm with an ulterior motive that the Appellant should not appear before the Respondent no.2 and by sighting the non-appearance of the Appellant before the Respondent no.2 the Appeal filed by the Appellant would/could be filed illegally. Hence, appropriate departmental proceedings must be ordered to be initiated against the erring officials for committing such illegalities being hand in glove with the employee who had committed many illegalities and do not deserve to be a Government servant for committing such illegalities as pointed out in the Application under RTI act (Annexure A-1),
6. That the appellant would like to bring to your kind consideration that an FIR No.68, dated 12.07.2015 under Section/s 353, 332, 341, 137, 186, 189 read Page 4 of 8 with Section 149 of IPC registered at Police Station: Parwanoo, District: Solan (H.P.) against Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, OMSH-16, Chandigarh and others but he did not informed his competent authority about the same as per Service Rules applicable upon him consequently, Memo No.E-III-2021/11598 dated 21.06.2021 Was issued to Harpal Singh Bul, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH- 16, Chandigarh directing him to give is his reply within the stipulated time as mentioned in the same but he had not submitted his reply to the same till the filing of Annexure A-1 Le. for more than Two Years.
7. That since the department officials were hand in glove with Harpal Singh (details mentioned above) no action has been taken against him for concealing the fact regarding registration of above mentioned FIR and remaining in police custody for couple of days which is willful misconduct/s, and against the Service Rules as applicable upon him,
8. That it is pertinent to mention here that according to the Service Rules as applicable to Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH-16, Chandigarh, he was duty bound to intimate the concerned Senior officials/officers of GMSH, Sector-16, Chandigarh about the registration of an FIR No.68, dated 12.07.2015 under Section/s 353, 332, 341, 137, 186, 189 read with Section 149 of IPC registered at Police Station: Parwanoo, District: Solan (H.P.) against him and his family members which is a grave MISCONDUCT as per Service Rules as applicable on Harpal Singh Bal (above mentioned)
9. That the respondent No.2 was duty bound to take appropriate disciplinary action against Harpal Singh for his deliberate of misconduct as per service rules but undue favour has been given to him which is apparent from the fact that more than two years have elapsed from the issuance of memo dated 21.06.2021 but no action has been taken against Harpal Singh and as mentioned in the application under RTI Act, no action has also been taken against the dealing hand for keeping the matter under carpet.
10. That Harpal Singh Bal, Senior Medical Laboratory Technician, Blood Bank, GMSH-16, Chandigarh, attended the Court proceedings initiated against him and others at Kasauli (H.P) from year 2015 to 2021 by availing Station Leave on some occasions but in none of the application/s deliberately not mentioned his "Address (while on CL)" on the specific column of his leave application/s, particularly when he was on Station Leave, amounts to Misconduct as per Page 5 of 8 Service Rules as applicable upon him but no action has been taken against him till date which action is illegal and arbitrary and against the service rules as applicable on Harpal Singh.
11. That under rule 3 (1) of Government Employees (Conduct) Rules, 1966, Every Government employee shall maintain (i) absolute integrity (ii) maintain devotion to duty and (ii) do nothing which is unbecoming of a Government employee and (iv) intimate his latest permanent as well as temporary address to his appointing authority...."
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not present.
Respondent: Shri Pawan Kumar, Superintendent/CPIO present through video- conference.
Respondent submitted that since the information sought by the appellant pertains to personal information of third party and nowhere in the RTI application he has established his locus or larger public interest in seeking the information, therefore, reply as per the provisions of the RTI Act has already been provided to the appellant vide letter dated 12.07.2023.
Decision:
The Commission, after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the records, notes that the main premise of the instant Appeal was denial of information by the Respondent. In response to which, the Respondent replied that since the information sought by the Appellant pertains to personal information of third party, therefore, information being exempted from disclosure has been denied to the Appellant under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
The Commission is of considered view that the respondent has appropriately denied the information to the appellant as it contains personal information of third party which cannot be disclosed under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The same can be garnered from a bare perusal of the text of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act as under:Page 6 of 8
"8. Exemption from disclosure of information.--
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, xxx
(j) information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information;.."
In this regard, attention of the Appellant is drawn towards a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal in Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 with Civil Appeal No. 10045 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 2683 of 2010 wherein the import of "personal information" envisaged under Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act has been exemplified in the context of earlier ratios laid down by the same Court in the matter(s) of Canara Bank Vs. C.S. Shyam in Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009; Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commissioner & Ors., (2013) 1 SCC 212 and R.K. Jain vs. Union of India & Anr., (2013) 14 SCC 794. The following was thus held:
"59. Reading of the aforesaid judicial precedents, in our opinion, would indicate that personal records, including name, address, physical, mental and psychological status, marks obtained, grades and answer sheets, are all treated as personal information. Similarly, professional records, including qualification, performance, evaluation reports, ACRs, disciplinary proceedings, etc. are all personal information. Medical records, treatment, choice of medicine, list of hospitals and doctors visited, findings recorded, including that of the family members, information relating to assets, liabilities, income tax returns, details of investments, lending and borrowing, etc. are personal information. Such personal information is entitled to protection from unwarranted invasion of privacy and conditional access is available when stipulation of larger Page 7 of 8 public interest is satisfied. This list is indicative and not exhaustive..."
Emphasis Supplied.
Neither in the RTI application nor in the instant appeal have the Appellant brought out any overriding public interest that will be served with the disclosure of the personal information of a third-party.
Hence, no cause of action subsists in the matter under the RTI Act for further adjudication.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, Director Health and Family Welfare, Chandigarh Administration, Government Multi-Specialty Hospital, Sector 16, Chandigarh - 160015 Page 8 of 8 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)